Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

As you can see, the debate on Tau rages on. Nuts and bolts are: if you play them prepare to get your ass handed to you for a while until you learn how to use them. Don't go getting all quitty on it, just man up and plow through.

You have been warned.

Timmah wrote:I don't understand why everyone references 5th ed and uses it as a basis for why Tau are bad.

Things 5th ed gives you.

Easier cover for Kroot
Better assault rules
AP1 weapons with a 72" range (awesome for killing tanks)
easy ways to negate cover


Honestly, what 5th ed changes hurt tau?

Tau are VERY dependent upon elite and heavy choices and compared to other armies tau have relatively weak troop choices. Kroot are not good, they are ok at best, they are not good in assault they are mediocre in it. They are best used by being in cover on an objective. And Firewarriors have str 5 guns that's amazing... but they also lack any special weapons in their squads.

This has weakened tau because in 5th edition we have very limited ability to attack and take ground, this is something tau was amazing at during 4th edition. I'm not saying Tau are bad but we aren't they army we used to be.

Red_Lives wrote:

Timmah wrote:I don't understand why everyone references 5th ed and uses it as a basis for why Tau are bad.

Things 5th ed gives you.

Easier cover for Kroot
Better assault rules
AP1 weapons with a 72" range (awesome for killing tanks)
easy ways to negate cover


Honestly, what 5th ed changes hurt tau?

Tau are VERY dependent upon elite and heavy choices and compared to other armies tau have relatively weak troop choices. Kroot are not good, they are ok at best, they are not good in assault they are mediocre in it. They are best used by being in cover on an objective. And Firewarriors have str 5 guns that's amazing... but they also lack any special weapons in their squads.

This has weakened tau because in 5th edition we have very limited ability to attack and take ground, this is something tau was amazing at during 4th edition. I'm not saying Tau are bad but we aren't they army we used to be.

Well I've heard eldar players make the same claim.. as well as necron players.. just saying..

Canonness Rory wrote:
Which is why Tau win GTs all the time, right?

People always say Tau are awesome if played/built/worshipped right, and yet, nobody can provide examples of good Tau play/builds.

.

Tau won a GT last november. 10 XV8 Crisis. 6 FW. two squads of Kroot. Three Hammerheads. 1500 points.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Timmah wrote:1 fireknife commander
9 fireknife crisis suits
2 piranhas w/ fusion blaster
2x (10 kroot + 7 kroot hounds)
6x fire warriors
8x pathfinders w/devilfish
2x hammerhead w/railgun
2x broadsides

This is what I run at 1850. Kroot and piranhas block movement very effectively. Comfortably sit at 30"+ range and destroy the enemy.

Tau just basically out shoot everything at long range.
.

I run almost the same list and do well enough .

mattv2099 wrote:

Canonness Rory wrote:
Which is why Tau win GTs all the time, right?

People always say Tau are awesome if played/built/worshipped right, and yet, nobody can provide examples of good Tau play/builds.

.

Tau won a GT last november. 10 XV8 Crisis. 6 FW. two squads of Kroot. Three Hammerheads. 1500 points.

Ahahaha proof for the non believers

Oh and look, its pretty much my exact build I referenced.

*sorry, can't resist!*

they're not just good, they're FOR THE GREATER GOOD!

i seem to have different experiences with my tau then other players. you have to be careful that you don't load too many points in the crisis suits or other expensive units. tau firewarriors have (with a possible tie with sonic weapon noise marines) the best standard shooting weapon in the game. range 30, rapid fire, strength 5 gives you alot of options that even a bolter wouldn't have. i'd say my most effective units are the "fish of fury" in which you move a wall of devilfish loaded with firewarriors up and support them with a few marker lights.

Timmah wrote:

Canonness Rory wrote:

If you build them to be top tier competitive, then yes, they wreck face. I would go so far as to say they are the best army in the game when built to correctly.

Which is why Tau win GTs all the time, right?

People always say Tau are awesome if played/built/worshipped right, and yet, nobody can provide examples of good Tau play/builds.

Focusedfire may do well with his, but that's what you get when you play a single army for as long as he does.


Tau are mid-tier at best.

Because no one brings good Tau lists to tournaments probably. Everyone is still in love with fire warriors and devilfish.

Besides, have you looked at the lists that win GT's? I mean Orks still wins constantlyu. Sorry but you don't need a GT win by Tau to prove they are amazing.

Emphasis mine.

That is because Orks are still a VERY good army. Some of the more simple builds lost steam when people figured out how to play against them, but they're still good, damn good.

I do agree that Tau are a phenominal army when built and played properly. They're also very difficult to play and are extremely unforgiving to mistakes. When played correctly, though, they're hell on wheels.

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?catId=&categoryId=§ion=&pIndex=0&aId=700001a&start=1

looks like GW themselves decided to answer your question!

Apparently pulse rifles are AP 4

"you have 20 Strength 5 AP4"

according to said article. Woow.

warboss wrote:http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?catId=&categoryId=§ion=&pIndex=0&aId=700001a&start=1

looks like GW themselves decided to answer your question!

That is the worst place to get tactical advice. I have an old white dwarf in which several teams of GW guys played in a huge tournament. They all got their asses kicked because they suck at 40k.

Canonness Rory wrote:

Because no one brings good Tau lists to tournaments probably. Everyone is still in love with fire warriors and devilfish.

Besides, have you looked at the lists that win GT's? I mean Orks still wins constantlyu. Sorry but you don't need a GT win by Tau to prove they are amazing.

"Nobody brings good Tau lists to tournaments?"
Seriously? You are claiming people don't powergame enough in tournies? Or is it that Tau players are just so pure and holy that they don't participate in tournies?

Orks win constantly because orks are a Tier 1 army. If you think Tau are so awesome, how many tournies have you won with them? Tau don't have a single good unit the way SMs have Termies, Orks have Nobs, Chaos has oblits, and Ig has Vets. Sorry, but an army's strength is judged by how well it does in games, and Tau don't do well in games, end of argument.

Broadsides are one the best units in the game IMO. I've played tau and had great success with them. I had much more success playing a gun line than mech tau. Tau are fragile and unforgiving but are one of the best shooting armies in the game.

Tau will be frustrating if you are learning the game playing them but if you like the models and have some patience then I say go for it.

Timmah wrote:

Because no one brings good Tau lists to tournaments probably. Everyone is still in love with fire warriors and devilfish.

Besides, have you looked at the lists that win GT's? I mean Orks still wins constantlyu. Sorry but you don't need a GT win by Tau to prove they are amazing.

That's because orks are good and tau aren't.

When people ask this I always answer the same way.
If you like them, then buy them. You wont enjoy this game at all if you play an army you were pressured into playing. Are they harder to be competitive with? yea sure they are. They are one of those armies youll need to buy a few good things right off the bat. Unlike Orks where they are rather felxible.
Im not talking tournament style either. I leave that crap alone. People in tournaments have no clue of how to play to enjoy. They are all about power builds and KO'ing their opponent as fast as possible.
So again if you like them, like the look and fluff and whatnot then go for it. Youll enjoy it more playing something like that.

1500 points of Tau and never looked back. Yes they do suck at CC but if you get the hand of their manoverabilty and the awesome fire power they can lay down an an enemy, they really do come inot their own. So to answer your question, yes tau are worth is, they are a fantastic army to model, paint and mst importantly play. (and in my opinion they look the coolest to )

Elliotminorkid

no they are not good

yes they are good

with 5th ed rules, you need troops... tau troops suck.

kroot NEED cover... and there is an ever increasing ammount of cover ignoring weapons...
and the Fire Warriors are T3 with a 4+ save... kiss them goodby if a heavy bolter even LOOKS at them funny.

sure, you can have a bunch of suits... but with easily killed troops you will be at BEST pulling a draw for most of your games unless you can table the other guy...


the way to get around fire warriors going down faster then a teen on prom night is to put them in fish... just wait and see how well THAT works out.



i was able to take best overall with my Tau army back in 4th... but 5th... ewwwwww.

well tau have good weapons but they aren't very good at shooting them so whats the point. But i guess there are other aspects to the tau but thats how i see it basically.

"AP1 weapons with a 72" range (awesome for killing tanks)"

Unless I'm mistaken and I very well may(correct me if I'm wrong, seriously) be I was under the impression that AP does nothing against vehicles....

I was told the only thing to take into consideration was str...

xGhost4000x wrote:"AP1 weapons with a 72" range (awesome for killing tanks)"

Unless I'm mistaken and I very well may(correct me if I'm wrong, seriously) be I was under the impression that AP does nothing against vehicles....

I was told the only thing to take into consideration was str...

AP1 = +1 on damage chart.
So you have a 50% chance of destroying the vehicle (either through a wrecked or explodes result) with an penetrating AP1 hit.

Edit:
Nice thread necro by the way Mathais...

"AP1 = +1 on damage chart.
So you have a 50% chance of destroying the vehicle (either through a wrecked or explodes result) with an penetrating AP1 hit. "

*checks rule book*

well would ya look at that, it seems like since I started 40k 3 weeks ago I learn something new every day....


Automatically Appended Next Post:

agnosto wrote:

xGhost4000x wrote:"AP1 weapons with a 72" range (awesome for killing tanks)"

Unless I'm mistaken and I very well may(correct me if I'm wrong, seriously) be I was under the impression that AP does nothing against vehicles....

I was told the only thing to take into consideration was str...

AP1 = +1 on damage chart.
So you have a 50% chance of destroying the vehicle (either through a wrecked or explodes result) with an penetrating AP1 hit.

Edit:
Nice thread necro by the way Mathais...

Wait...actually I was just reading through the rule book...

So I roll to hit
roll to pierce armor d6+wep str
and then if it is a glanced or pen hit I roll to see what damage....

1 shaken
2 stunned
3 wep damage
4 immobolize
5 destroyed(wrecked)
6 destroyed(explodes)

That is how you do it right?
hehe, sorry for asking about this when this is clearly not the rule section of the forums...

Eh, no biggie. Yeah, roll to hit, roll to pen (or glance) then roll on the chart.

Keep in mind that melta weapons roll 2d6 for pen as do monstrous creatures.

agnosto wrote:Eh, no biggie. Yeah, roll to hit, roll to pen (or glance) then roll on the chart.

Keep in mind that melta weapons roll 2d6 for pen as do monstrous creatures.

Keep in mind monstrous creatures only roll 2d6 for pen when they are in CC.

Railguns are a MUST in tau armies.

Pro tip - For every 500 points try to place a railgun in your army. For 1500 points my railgun choices is a hammerhead and 3 broadsides.

Tau are semi-competitive and tier 3 (some might argue tier 2).

Which armies would you consider are better than Tau?

I would say that any army with a 5e codex has a built-in advantage.

Yes